[Ndca-l] Results of the Ethics Statement voting

Stefan Bauschard stefan.bauschard
Tue Nov 3 16:49:12 EST 2009


The problem is that in this instance it was explicitly explained that not
voting is voting no...so many people who did not vote could potentially
expressing a no vote.

28 yes people supported it
4 no people (probablystrongly) oppsed it
(xy) people did not vote
(x) opposed
(y) didn't care

Since we have no idea how many peopel are in each category of xy, it's
impossible to speculate whether or not it would have passed if the voting
procedures would have been different.

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Speer, Mike <SpeerMik at berkeleyprep.org>wrote:

> While reasonable people can certainly disagree, the Ethics Statement
> seemed like a pretty gentle nudge in the direction of some community
> norms on these important matters.
>
> If the NDCA members are concerned about the potential chaos of
> unfettered democracy, maybe a rule requiring 60 percent approval of
> respondents would an appropriate compromise.
>
> I am not completely convinced that the majority of the 90 members who
> did not vote intended their "non-vote" to be counted as a "no."
>
> Mike Speer
> Debate Coach
> Director of Technology
> Berkeley Preparatory School
> Tampa, FL 33634
> (813) 777-4298
>
> Berkeley puts people in the world who make a positive difference.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ndca-l-bounces at lists.debatecoaches.org
> [mailto:ndca-l-bounces at lists.debatecoaches.org] On Behalf Of Michael
> Antonucci
> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 2:53 PM
> To: Tara Tate
> Cc: <ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org>
> Subject: Re: [Ndca-l] Results of the Ethics Statement voting
>
> I feel the 60% threshold should be directly repealed.
>
> If America maintained this voting threshold, we would have lapsed into
> anarchy long ago.
>
> many members of the Ndca are not very participatory.  this is fine.
> It just shouldn't be a block on ever doing anything.
>
> Of course, I am not sure how you can repeal the rule absent 60%
> approval?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 3, 2009, at 2:32 PM, "Tara  Tate" <ttate at glenbrook.k12.il.us>
> wrote:
>
> > The NDCA Ethics Statement failed to receive 60% approval of the
> > membership body.  At the time elections were closed, the NDCA had
> > 122 members.  74 "yes" votes were needed to pass.
> >
> > 32 members did vote in the process.  Of those that did choose to
> > vote, 28 voted yes and 4 voted no.
> >
> > We will be starting a discussion the NDCA listserv about possible
> > amendments to the document (if the body feels like a statement is
> > necessary) and a discussion about the 60% threshold.  The discussion
> > will just be some informal dialogue about how the membership wishes
> > to proceed on this issue (or to proceed at all).
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> > Tara L. Tate
> > Director of Debate, Glenbrook South (IL)
> > Executive Board Member, National Debate Coaches Association
> > Co-director, The 2009 Glenbrooks
> > 4000 West Lake Avenue
> > Glenview, IL 60026
> > (847) 486-4746
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Ndca-l mailing list
> Ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
> http://lists.debatecoaches.org/listinfo.cgi/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org
> _______________________________________________
> Ndca-l mailing list
> Ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
> http://lists.debatecoaches.org/listinfo.cgi/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org
>



-- 
Stefan Bauschard

President & Co-Founder, PlanetDebate.com
Debate Coach, Harvard Debate
Director of Debate, Lakeland Schools
Director of Development & Operations, NFL National Tournament 2011


(c) 781-775-0433
(fx) 617-588-0283
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.debatecoaches.org/pipermail/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org/attachments/20091103/c86f2eb6/attachment.htm>



More information about the Ndca-l mailing list